28/05/2017 Sunday Politics West

Good morning and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

New CCTV images are released showing suicide bomber, Salman Abedi,

on the night he attacked Manchester Arena, killing 22 people.

Are the politicians and the security services doing

Theresa May says Britain needs to be "stronger and more resolute"

in confronting extremist views, as she outlines plans

for a new Commission to counter extremism.

We'll be talking to the Security Minister.

Jeremy Corbyn says a Labour government would recruit 1,000

more staff at security and intelligence agencies.

In the West: Getting the message across The independents

bringing a bit of colour to the general election campaign.

supporters. In London, we look at what the Conservatives are offering

the capital, having voted Remain. To help guide me through this

morning, I'm joined by Steve Richards, Julia

Hartley-Brewer and Tim Marshall. They'll be sharing their thoughts

on Twitter and you can join So, with a week and a half to go,

the election campaign And some recent polls

suggest the race is just We'll be taking a closer look

at that in just a moment but, first, here are some of the key events over

the next 10 days or so: Tonight at 6pm will see the third

of the party leader interviews. This time it's the SNP's

Nicola Sturgeon facing questions While many across the UK will be

enjoying tomorrow's bank holiday, there will be no break

in campaigning for And in the evening it will be

the turn of Ukip's Paul Nuttall On Tuesday the SNP

publish their manifesto - the last of the major parties to do

so - after last week's Then on Wednesday, the BBC's

Election Debate will see representatives from the seven main

parties debate in front On Thursday, Lib Dem leader Tim

Farron will have his interview... Before Friday's Question Time

special with Theresa May They won't debate each other,

but will take questions consecutively from members

of the audience. The final week of campaigning

is a short one, with politicians cramming in three days

of door-knocking before voters go We'll have an exit poll once

voting has ended at 10pm, with the result expected early

in the morning of June 9th. Well, it's Sunday, and that always

means a spate of new opinion And they make for fascinating,

if a tad confusing, reading. There are five new opinion

polls today, which have the Conservative lead

over Labour anywhere from six points to 14 points.

So, what's going on? Professor John Curtice

is the expert we always turn to at times like this,

and he joins me from Glasgow. Take us through these polls. They

seem to be all over the place? They may seem to be but there is a very

consistent key message. Four of these five polls, if you compare

them with what they were saying before the Conservative manifesto

launch on the 18th, four say the Conservatives are down by two

points. Four of them say the Labour vote is up by two points. A clear

consistent message. The Conservative lead has narrowed. Why does this

matter? It matters because we are now in a position where the leads

are such that the Conservatives can no longer be sure of getting the

landslide majority they want. Some posters suggesting they may be in

trouble and it is going to get rather close. Others suggested is

further apart. There are two major sources of... The Poles agree that

young voters will vote Labour if they vote. Older voters will vote

for the Conservatives. How many of those younger voters will turn out

to vote? The second thing is whether the evidence in the opinion polls

that the Conservatives are advancing more in the North of England and the

Midlands is realised that the ballot box? If it is not realised, the

Tories chances of getting a landslide look remote. If it is,

they could still well indeed get a majority more than 80%. The

Conservatives have lost some ground depending on which opinion poll you

look at. What about the Labour Party? It is gaining ground. It has

been gaining ground ever since week one. They started on 26, they now

average 35. There were a lot of people out there at the beginning of

the campaign who were saying, I usually vote Labour but the truth is

I'm not sure about Jeremy Corbyn. They seem to have decided the Labour

manifesto wasn't so bad. They have looked at Theresa May and have said,

we will stick with Labour. Labour have managed to draw back into the

fold some of their traditional voters who were disenchanted,

together with, crucially, some of those younger voters who have never

voted before, who have always been a particular target for Jeremy Corbyn.

What is your reaction to previous opinion polls and elections weather

has been a feeling that some of the Labour support has been overstated?

This be a worry this time? That is one of the uncertainties that faces

the opinion polls and the rest of us. We had a conference on Friday at

which it was carefully explained that pollsters have been trying to

correct the errors that resulted in an overestimation of Labour support

a couple of years ago, particularly among younger voters. You shouldn't

assume the opinion polls will be wrong this time because they were

wrong the last time. We want in truth know whether or not the polls

have got it right. Even if they are wrong in terms of the level, they

are not wrong in terms of the trend. The trends have been dramatic so

far. A big rise in Tory support early on at the expense of Ukip. And

subsequently, a remarkable rise in Labour support, albeit from a low

initial baseline. This election has already seen quite a lot of

movement. We shouldn't rule out the possibility there will be yet more

in the ten days to come. That is his analysis. Let's talk to

the panel. Julia, how concerned should Conservative headquarters be

at this particular point at what looks like an apparent surge by

Labour? Depends if you want a massive landslide majority or might

not. I assume the Tory party do. Whether anybody thinks that is a

good idea is a different matter. Undoubtedly the manifesto league was

a total disaster. Social care policy and the U-turn. Lots of stuff in the

Labour manifesto was very appealing. The tactic from Sir Lynton Crosby

was clear. It is all about Theresa May. Don't even mention the

candidate or the party. The Labour Party, the candidates are on the

moderate side are saying, don't mention Jeremy Corbyn. This has been

a battle between two big people. The more we have seen of Theresa May,

she has gone down. The more we have seen of Jeremy Corbyn, he has gone

up. If you make it about strong and stable leadership and then you do

something like a massive unprecedented U-turn on a key policy

like social care, the knock is even greater. Do you think that is the

reason for the change in the opinion polls or is Labour gaining some

momentum? I think it is part of the reason. You can understand why the

focus was on her at the beginning because her personal ratings were

stratospheric. What is interesting is all successful leaders basically

cast a spell over voters in the media. None of them are titans. All

of them are flawed. It is a question of when the spell is broken. This is

a first for a leader's spell to be broken during an election campaign.

That was a moment of high significance. The fact the Labour

Party campaign is more robust than many thought it would be is the

other factor. I think it is the combination of the two, that the

trend, as Professor John Curtis said, the trend has been this

narrow. There has not been much campaigning. Local campaigning

resumed on Thursday, national campaigning on Friday. Do you think,

Tim Marshall, that the opinion polls are reflecting what happened in

Manchester and people's thoughts about which party will keep them

safe? No, I think that will come next week. I think it is too soon

for that. It was quite understandable from the V -- the

very beginning for Lynton Crosby to frame the campaign in terms of

Theresa May and Brexit. The electorate can have its own view.

You always have to go back to Clinton's it's the economy stupid

for most of the electorate. It is framed in your electricity bill. It

is framed in your jobs. Both manifestos have got more holes in

them than Swiss cheese. It comes down to which manifesto you believe.

The Labour manifesto makes more promises about things you care about

like your electricity bill. Interesting, but in the end despite

while we thought would be a Brexit election, it has been a lot about

public services. It always comes down to bread-and-butter issues. I

don't think we have quite seen how the terrorist you has played out. We

had the Westminster attack only a couple of months ago. That was

already factored in in terms of who you trust and who you don't trust.

The IRA stuff from Jeremy Corbyn is already factored in. People actually

care about how ordinary government policies affect their lives. Thank

you very much. The election campaign was,

of course, put on hold following the terrorist

attack in Manchester But now that campaigning has

resumed, it's hardly surprising that security

is now a primary concern. The Labour Party has announced it

would recruit 1,000 more Jeremy Corbyn, speaking on ITV at

short while ago, says previous cuts have undermined security.

It seems that the cuts in police numbers have led to some very

dangerous situation is emerging. It is also a question of a community

response as well. So that where, an imam, for example, lets the police

he is concerned about a muddy, I would hope they would act. And I

would hope we have -- and I would hope they would have the resources

to act as well. Joining me now from Leeds

is the Shadow Justice Good morning. You have announced a

thousand more Security and Intelligence agency staff. That is

in line with what the government has already announced and the Shadow

Home Secretary, Diane Abbott, has said you would not be spending any

more money. It doesn't amount to much, does it? That is just one of

the parts of our pledge card on the safer communities. There is also

10,000 extra police, because the Conservatives cut the police by

20,000. That 10,000 extra police would mean in -- and extra police

officer in each neighbourhood. There are 3000 extra put -- prison

officers. Prison staff has been cut by 6000. That is a third. It is not

helping keep communities safer. We are pledging 3000 extra

firefighters. Also, a thousand extra security staff and 500 extra border

guards. There have been 13 areas identified where our borders are not

as secure as they should be. That is the list of numbers you have given.

If we concentrate on the security services, because it was Jeremy

Corbyn he said there will be more police on the streets under Labour.

If the security sources need more resources they should get them. Why

aren't you giving them more? We are committing to a thousand more

police. The Godinet is doing that as well. You are not committing

anything more. The government has not delivered on that promise. We

will deliver on that promise is -- promise. What Jeremy has made very

clear is that you can't do security on the cheap. Austerity has to stop

at the police station door, and at the hospital door. But we will be

giving the resources required to keep our communities safer. So you

will give them the resources and more powers? Well, the police need

to be empowered. But when you listen to what the Police Federation are

saying, they have been speaking out for a long time about the danger

caused by police cuts. And I'm talking not only about terrorism,

not only about acts of extreme violence, but anything from

anti-social behaviour to burglary. Use it more powers. What sort of

powers are you thinking of giving the security services? We need to

listen to them. That is not a power. We need to listen to the

intelligence community and the security service, to the army and

the police, about what they think and how they think our communities

could be made safe. One thing is clear. Cutting the number of police

by 20,000 makes our community is less safe, not more safe. You said

you will listen to the security services. Can voters be reassured

and guaranteed that Jeremy Corbyn will listen to the security services

and the police in terms of more powers if that is what they want?

Until now he has spent his whole political career voting against

measures designed to tackle home-grown and international

terrorism. Jeremy Corbyn's speech on safer communities earlier this week

made clear he is listening to the security services. So he would grant

those new powers. He voted against the terrorism Act in 2000, into

thousands and six. In 2011. And in 2014, the data retention and

investigatory Powers act. Which new powers will he be happy to enact?

Just to say, Jeremy Corbyn along with Theresa May, David Davis and

many Conservative MPs, voted against legislation where they thought it

would be ill-advised, ineffective or actually counter-productive. It is a

very complex situation. What we don't want to do is introduce

hastily prepared laws with one eye to the newspaper headlines, which

can act as recruiting sergeants for terrorism. And actually, when I said

earlier that Jeremy Corbyn made clear in his speech this week that

he has been listening to the security services, what he said

about the international situation has also been said by the former

head of MI5, Stella Rimington, and her predecessor. As well as

president of back -- President Barack Obama.

You say he will give the police and security services the resources and

powers they need. If we look back at some of the legislation Jeremy

Corbyn and others voted against in 2000, it gave the Secretary of State

the -- new powers... Does Jeremy Corbyn still think that is a bad

idea? Jeremy Corbyn along with Theresa May, David Davis and

others... I know you want to bracket it with Conservatives but I'm

interested in what Jeremy Corbyn will do when he says we are going to

be smarter about fighting terrorism. If he's not prepared to vote in

favour of those sorts of measures, or trying to impose restrictions on

suspects, I'm trying to find out what he will do. It is a complex

situation. With this legislation the devil is often in the detail. If it

was a simple and stopping terrorism by voting a piece of legislation

through Parliament, it would have been stopped a long time ago. Sadly

there are no easy answers, and that is recognised by Barack Obama,

Stella Rimington, the head of the MI5, by David Davis and other

Conservative MPs. What is clear, as Jeremy made clear in his speech this

week, is the way things are being done currently is not working. We

have got to be tough on terrorism and the unforgivable acts of murder,

but also tough on the causes of terrorism as well. The sad truth is

there are no easy answers. If there were, the problem would have been

solved a long time ago. If you more security and terrorism officers but

your leader is still uncomfortable with giving them the powers they

need to do their jobs because it is complicated legislation, they will

want to know how you are going to do it. At another stop the War rally in

2014, Jeremy Corbyn said the murder of a charity worker was jingoism. At

the beginning of that speech he mentioned the importance of the

one-minute silence for the memory of Alan Henning who was murdered. What

he has also made clear is responsibility for acts of terrorism

and murder lies with the murder, and something that's really disappointed

me is that the Prime Minister said the other day that in Jeremy

Corbyn's speech on this on Monday, he said... Whether she agrees with

him on his politics, she knows he didn't say that in his speech, but

what troubles me is you have got a Prime Minister who must have sat

down with her advisers earlier that day and said, well I do know he

didn't say that but if we say he did we might win some votes. I think

that is shameful and it shows Theresa May cannot be trusted. These

issues should transcend party politics. We need to pull together

on this issue. Thank you very much. Well, the Conservatives have

promised a new statutory commission The party says it will identify

extremism, including the "non-violent" kind,

and help communities stand up to it. Also this morning,

the Security Minister, Ben Wallace, has attacked internet giants

for failing to tackle terror online, and accused them

of being ruthless money-makers. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Those comments you have made about social media companies failing in

their responsibility to take down extremist material, what will you do

to compel them? I think we will look at the range of options. The Germans

have proposed a fine, we are not sure whether that will work, but

there are range of pressures we can put onto some of these companies.

Some have complied. In the article in the Sunday Telegraph today I did

say it is not all of them. They are not immune to pressure. We can do

internationally, and the Prime Minister urged at the G7 and

international response. I think there are a range of issues. We

could change the law. You mentioned the G7, and rhetoric and warm words

are fine to an extent but it is action people want. If you have made

these impassioned remarks in the newspapers about them failing to do

the job, people want to know what powers do you have now to say to

social media companies take down this material? We have an act that

was recently passed. In this area we have just finished consulting on one

of the areas we could use but we cannot pre-empt the consultation. We

have right now officials from my department over in the United States

with American officials working with CSPs because what we see is that

they do respond to pressure. The best example is we think they have

the technology and the capability to change the algorithms they use that

maximise profit over safety. But you are relying on these companies

devoting more resources to this line of work that you would like to see

them do. Have you got any evidence they will do that? They said, only a

few weeks ago before the election was called the Home Secretary hosted

a Round Table with them. We have evidence they are trying to improve

it. A few are refusing to or being difficult, and that's why the Prime

Minister was right to step up not only the language she was using but

to say we are not going to allow this to progress any more. People

will be worried about who will make the judgment about what is

unacceptable and what should be taken down. Let me show you this,

which was shared widely across social media. If you read that quote

you could argue it is at the same end if you like. The man in the

picture is a terrorist hate preacher, the jihadist who was

killed in Yemen by the Americans. Is this the sort of thing you would be

demanding social media companies take down? You have to look at the

context it was deployed in. I could show you some of the 270,000 pieces

we have had removed since 2010 from internet sites that have been

extreme. The big issue is not often the individual image, it is the way

these companies set up the algorithms to link you. If you were

watching that on Facebook delivered to you, perhaps you would like to

look at this, because that's how they set it up. If you go onto

YouTube, you can get let down the path from looking at Manchester... I

understand your example, but from a practical level are you expecting

media companies to take down that sort of posts if it appeared? Yes...

You are? Who will make the decisions about what will radicalise young

people that could lead someone down the path to let off a bomb? If I

invite your viewers to look at the work the Guardian have done on

Facebook guidance, to say for example it is OK to produce videos

or broadcast videos of seven-year-olds being bullied as

long as it wasn't accompanied by captions, I don't think you need to

be an expert to say that is not acceptable. Something more worrying

for you as a journalist and me as a politician, another set of guidance

that says... I think this is quite menacing... That certain people

don't deserve our protection. That includes journalists and politicians

and people who are controversial. So I think there is more work to be

done but at the end of the day it is the pathway this stuff leads to. It

is more about examining how much progress you can make. The

Government says there are up to 23,000 potential terrorist attackers

in this country, 3000 of those posing a serious threat being

monitored. That is pretty disturbing, these are big numbers.

Yes, and the tragedy of Manchester shows this is not about failure, it

is about the scale of the challenge we face and that is why it is

important that alongside people is powers. Should you double the size

of MI5 for example? We have increased year-on-year in real terms

not only the money but the numbers of people in MI5. It is now 2000 we

have committed to increased to... Before the attack. Before our

manifesto we had recruited, we have increased the whole of government

spending on counterterrorism from ?11.7 billion in 2015 up to 15.7

billion. Would you expand the number of people in MI5? I have asked them

on a regular basis if they have the resource if they are happy with it,

and the answer comes back time and time again, yes we are. You have

quite extensive powers at your disposal, the question is if you are

using them. Measures were introduced in 2012 to replace control orders,

but they have rarely been used. Only seven are currently in operation.

Why? Because there are a whole... It is just one tool in the tool box.

Other powers we use, we take away people's passports if we think they

are about to travel. How many? I cannot comment, it is a sensitive

issue. Plenty of people are finding their passport has been removed and

at the same time we strip people of citizenship to make sure they don't

come back. On top of that, because of the investment made in GCHQ, MI5

and counterterrorism, we have more powers and more ability to monitor

them. But are you using them enough? Only seven TPIMs are in operation.

You won't give me any of the other measures at your disposal, but if

they are only in single figures, that doesn't seem to compare with

the numbers who are being monitored. Also, we have to strike a balance

between... We have to satisfy the court so we have to make sure there

is enough evidence to restrict people's freedoms. TPIMs do all

sorts of good things to keep people safe. It sends people away from

where they live, it tags them... I tell you why they are better. The

control orders were on track to be struck down by the courts because

one of the things we have to satisfy is the courts but we also have to

satisfy, we have to make sure we get the balance between the community is

right and the measures we take. If we alienate our communities, we

won't get the intelligence that allows us to catch it. There is no

point in having more police and intelligence services if you don't

give them the powers to do the job. Jeremy Corbyn were licensed James

Bond to do precisely nothing. And -- thank you.

The revelation that the Manchester suicide bomber, 22-year-old

Salman Abedi, was born in this country has raised fresh concerns

about the effectiveness of the UK's counter-extremism policy.

In a moment we'll be talking to two people who've spent their careers

investigating radicalisation in the UK.

Douglas Murray, of the Henry Jackson Society,

and Sara Khan, author of The Battle for British Islam and CEO

of the counter-extremism organisation Inspire.

We asked both for a personal take on how to confront the problem

of Islamist extremism. First up, here's Douglas Murray.

Even after all these dead, all this mourning and defiance,

We remain stuck in the John Lennon response to terrorism -

Our politicians still refuse to accurately identify

the sources of the problem, and polite society

This country gave asylum to the Libyan parents of Salman Abedi.

Their son repaid that generosity by killing 22 British people,

one for each year of life this country had given him.

We need to think far more deeply about all this.

Eastern Europe doesn't have an Islamic terrorism problem

France has the worst problem because it has the most Islam.

Are we ever going to draw any lessons from this?

For the time being, the game is to be as inoffensive as possible.

The rot isn't just within the Muslim communities.

Consider all those retired British officials and others who shill,

and are in the pay of the Saudis and other foreign states,

even while they pump the extreme versions of Islam into our country.

It is high time we became serious too.

Islamist extremism is flourishing in our country.

We're failing to defeat it, so what can we do about it?

Whenever I say we must counter those Muslim organisations

who are promoting hatred, discrimination, and sometimes even

violence, I'm often either ignored by some politicians out

of a misplaced fear of cultural sensitivity, or I find myself

experiencing abuse by some of my fellow Muslims.

These groups and their sympathisers tour Muslim communities,

hold events, and have hundreds of thousands of followers

Yet there is little counter challenge to their toxic

anti-Western narrative, which includes opposition

I've seen politicians and charities partner

with and support some of these voices and groups.

Many anti-racist groups will challenge those on the far

right but not Muslim hate preachers, in the erroneous belief that to do

But it's Islamophobic not to challenge them because it implies

Following the attack on Monday, it cannot be business as usual.

We must counter those who seek to divide us.

Sarah Karen Allen Douglas Murray join me know. You wrote a book,

strange death of Europe. What did you mean in your film when you said,

let's get serious? Several things. Let me give you one example. The

young man who carried out this atrocious attack was a student at

Salford University for two years. He was on a campus which is, from its

leadership to its student leadership, opposes all aspects of

the government's only counter extremism programme. They boast they

are boycotting it. They always did this. The university he was at was

against the only counter extremism policy this state has. This is just

one example of a much bigger problem. What are you suggesting?

Shut down the University? Force them to change their policies? I think in

the case of Salford, which discourages students from reporting

Islamic extremism... When you discover you have produced a suicide

bomber in Manchester, you should be held responsible. What do you say to

that? I think it is quite clear from I am experienced there have been

politicians who have undermined Prevent, community organisations,

Islamist groups who have been at the forefront of undermining and

countering Prevent, but also wider counter extremism measures. Islamist

-- Islamist extremes and has flourished in this country. If

Summer Rae had given us a crystal ball ten years ago and said, look

forward and you will see hundreds of people leave this country to join

Isis, we will have hundreds of people convicted of Islamist

offences, I think we would have been quite shocked that things have got

worse as opposed to getting better. Douglas Murray, the essence of your

argument when you made the comparison between the numbers of

Muslims in other countries is that we have too much Islam in Britain?

The aunt Tilly Muslim Brotherhood give is that the answer to

absolutely everything is Islam. Less Islam is a good thing. Let me

finish. The Islamic world is in the middle of a very serious problem. It

has been going on since the beginning. I think it is not worth

continuing to risk our own security simply in order to be politically

correct. I would disagree with Douglas on that. Nobody is going to

deny that since the end of the 20th century there has been a rise in

Islamist extreme terror organisations. Yes, there is a

crisis within contemporary Islam, but there is a class. There are

competing claims about what the faith stands for. While we are

seeing Islamist terror organisations, leading theologians

are saying that the concept of a caliphate is outdated. Muslims

should be adopting a human rights culture. I entirely agree with that.

There are obviously people trying to counter that. I would urge us to

take the long view. In the history of Islam there have been many

reformers. Most of the time they have ended a up being the ones on

the brunt of the violence. I deeply resent what you and others do in

this country. I want you to win. But they are a Billy good minority. A

poll last year found that two thirds of British Muslims found they would

not report a family member they found to be involved in extremism to

the police. You are proposing more Draconian measures. I wish they

could win. We should do everything we can to support people like that.

What we should recognise the scale of the problem is beyond our current

understanding. You counter radicalisation on a university

campus or online? Discussion we had with Ben Wallace about the material

that is out there. If we pursue in a hard-line way perhaps the sort of

thing Douglas Murray is suggesting, gone is freedom of speech, gone is

freedom of debate and discussion? The best way to counter extremism is

through the prism of human rights. We cannot abandon our human rights

to fight extremism. Where I think we are going wrong, where there is a

gap, is the lack of counter work to challenge Islamist ideals. How many

people are going to say we need to counter that strict narrative? That

is where we are not doing enough work. What about the human rights

point, that you cannot take away people's human rights? I'm not

suggesting that. I'm suggesting we do things that ensure that 22 people

don't get blown up on an average Monday again, OK? Dissent to be

opposed to people want to blow up our daughters is not opposing human

rights. If you're taking government money and you are an institution

like Salford University you should be held responsible for not

cooperating with standard security measures. You can challenge

extremism without abandoning human rights. We have got to actually

counter the Islamist narrative. We're not doing enough. This is not

about closing down free speech. This is encouraging it. This is the most

effective way of countering the Islamist narrative. Why isn't it

doing better? A number of reasons. One is there is a denial taking

place. A lot of apologetics. Part of it is the way we talk about Muslims

in this country. We use the term Muslim community as if they are

homogenous. There is a positive trend but there is a negative trend

among British Muslims. We need to counter those promoting the idea

that Muslims are part of a collective identity. I agree. It is

also the case there is massive push back because a lot of Muslims are

defending the faith in this country. We think we can push them down a

better path but they are defending absolutely everything. We need to

get real about that. Thank you very much.

It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now

Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Week Ahead.

Welcome to Sunday Politics in the west.

The independents trying to get their message

across in the general election campaign.

I'm joined again by four election hopefuls.

They are the Conservative Simon Hoare, Labour's Thangam Debbonaire,

Gideon Amos for the Lib Dems and UKIP's Ernie Warrender.

We meet with our hearts broken for those victims

Of course, in our horror and disgust - we're turning to the politicians

to see how they plan to keep us safe in a dangerous world.

The answer for Labour's Diane Abbott is a big

The reason that we had to, we had to promised 10,000 extra police

officers is that an Theresa May 's watch they are 20,000 police

officers down so the cost of the entire package which is 10,000 extra

police officers, 3000 firefighters, 1000 security people, it would be

470 million. Diane Abbott on the 470 million. Diane Abbott on the

Andrew Marr show. Simon, all have the Conservatives cut 20,000 police

officers? We haven't. You have. We set the budget at the Home Office

and commissioners Aji Constable decide whether resources are

deployed. You know that if you don't give them the money then they can

stop Mac what we have done because stop Mac what we have done because

of the nature of policing, we know it is changing, the nature of

terrorism is changing as we saw at the tragic event in Manchester. . We

have to change the way that we deliver our security and policing

services so that is why the government, since 2010, has been

putting more money into organisations like MI5 and GCHQ as a

remind ourselves, as I think this is remind ourselves, as I think this is

the important thing, the issue is fundamentally about trust. We have a

Shadow Chancellor who said he would disband MI5 and disarm the police.

That is Labour's vision. You cannot trust the Labour Party... Hang on.

Lots of words and this is actions. You have cut budgets would have

forced police authorities to reduce the number of full-time officers,

and even in Somerset there are 602 down since 2010. Crime has been

following if you look at statistics across the country. What we have to

ensure and I think people really nor in the heart of hearts, when you

look at the Conservative Party we are the only party who can be really

trusted on delivering a secure country. Ex-mac Gideon Amos, do you

agree? The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Patrick, for us,

he has made very clear we need to put an extra 300 million into

policing. We need to release the 1% cap on police pay, which of course

is damaging to morale. Conservatives are also cutting the armed services.

200 Royal Marines poster going, Royal Marines can in Taunton Deane

is closing. You would reverse that? We would. Your policy is to roll

back surveillance and scrap the present programme. Is that wise? The

present programme has been showing to be not working, what we need is a

programme that is successful. What Brian Patrick has pointed out is

targeting people get her to make sure we are achieving... You are

against, you're fighting against encryption on what SAP and whatnot.

What we say is that having lighted surveillance on everything and

everyone is not the most successful week to identify terrorism. Only six

Lib Dem MPs bothered to vote on the investigatory Powers act which

brought together all the powers under one act. Six Lib Dem... To

answer your question, the reason is as I was saying, that blanket

surveillance when you invest huge resources... We would go down that

line. Thangam Debbonaire, R Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott the

accommodation to keep us safe? You decide Diane Abbott is it we would

reverse cuts to police funding and we would have 10,000 extra police

officers at a cost of 0.3 million that makes you buy 3 billion. We

know how much it will cost unlike the Tory manifesto and we have

worked out what our commitments will worked out what our commitments will

cost them where we will get the money from. We will invest in border

forces, which the Tory government has cut. Theresa May who has been

Home Secretary before she was Prime Minister, she is trying to act as

though nothing has gone wrong on her watch. Ex-mac do you agree with

Jeremy Corbyn that part of the terror problem is our own fault? The

fault of foreign policy? That is not what he said, he said

down terrorism, causes of terrorism down terrorism, causes of terrorism

are not foreign policy alone, he said that context is important. Do

you agree? As Boris John has also said context is incredibly

important. I used to work with violent men before I was a

politician and although the responsibility is always an then,

context did play a part. We got part of this on ourselves? That is not

I'm seeing, it is important to I'm seeing, it is important to

consider context. A Labour government would not be selling arms

to despotic regimes regimes where there are concerns about

international human rights. The Tory government is saying yes to arms

exports to 20 countries that their own foreign and Commonwealth of this

the context. If you help our people the context. If you help our people

who are going to cause human rights violations are helping to Stuttgart

fuel and hatred. It is part of the context. You are part of the

Parliamentary group on refugees, can you understand why some voters may

not think that having more refugees coming into the country may not be

wise? I know that every time I talk to people about refugees, I say to

someone in this country was at war and we were in conflict with you

expect our neighbours and neighbours and friends and allies to help as

they say yes. And when I say someone they say yes. And when I say someone

is fleeing persecution and torture and terror, do you think we should

welcome them and they say yes, but they also say that he will come must

be properly be sourced and worked out and is ten of the parliamentary

group I initiated an enquiry that did exactly that, we worked out how

to improve the welcome that we give. The security checks? Security checks

are important and that is why under a Labour government we would

increase border patrols. And anyone from Ukip, you promise more police

and prison officers. How would you pay? Typify this we have HS2, the

Victorian railway which the Tories are intent on providing when I can

get a phone signal let alone transfer data, there is a huge chunk

of money that we don't have but they will find it from somewhere, and we

want to put the foreign aid budget in line with Obama 's America and

Japan. With Jamaica for not so we Japan. With Jamaica for not so we

can hear you. Basically we have touched on security here. We don't

have much on security, freedom of movement, people can, Glasgow

please. That is just not true. -- people can come and go as they

finally. You say it is not true but finally. You say it is not true but

everyone is satisfied sky to freedom of movement. Theresa May has Home

Secretary was booed offstage at the Police Federation conference in

2012. We need more police and a more visible presence but we also need,

we did a wonderful thing in the fifties... Theresa May was booed by

the Police Federation. To take Thangam's point, let's put that into

context, it was a tough speech that the Prime Minister gave us Home

Secretary access to the Police Federation, which the readership

then accepted, that they needed to modernise and change the ways that

the operated as an organisation. That is where some of the building

came from. I don't think the key message from Theresa May has Home

Secretary and Prime Minister would be booed by the police because I

think they know quite rightly that has Home Secretary she made sure

whether it was sorting out stop and search are putting in place the

investigatory Powers act, making sure that our security and police

services and increasingly as we talk about integration... Very sorry, no

speeches. Thangam what would you say to that? I would challenge what

you're saying, I think it is that we are clear, there is a context we

response ability for terrorism has response ability for terrorism has

to be on the terrorist, however not having enough police makes people

feel fearful, people in Bristol and beyond have told me about their

anxieties about police cuts and they want them reversed. Treat people as

you would be treated as saying that would apply to Theresa May at the

least Federation, as public servants feel they're being treated badly by

Conservative ministers not only on paper than the way talked about and

that is the reaction they will get. Thank you.

Increased security measures have been in place at the Tall Ships

But that hasn't stopped thousands of people enjoying

But what are their thoughts on who should captain the country

Hello, welcome aboard. It is a glorious day for it. 50,000 people

expected through the doors today and we are on board the topsail schooner

I am told, one of seven tall ships in the stocks. It is sealed up from

Bristol for the bank holiday weekend. And Jack Sparrow from

Pirates of the Caribbean is currently engaged in a sword fight.

This area has always been a duel between the Conservatives and Labour

in with the polls narrowing the undecideds could be crucial so where

better than the tall ships Festival to look for the 14 border?

And he worked out who your going to vote for? I was conservative but now

I am not sure, she is scrapping the I am not sure, she is scrapping the

free meals. My son gets a free meals while not sure now. I am a

Conservative voter and I will be again. I'm a teacher so I have

experienced how bad it has been for local schools to have the budget cut

and they will cut them again. I have lived been not pro-Tory. Not

pro-Tory at all but Weaver makes more sense to me. Getting a third of

the US move them quickly as possible. I am astonished

Conservative. James is staunch Labour. Do you get along? We do. We

are the best of friends. I think the weights have got some very good

points extract we are supporters of good King George III, long may he

reign! He is a bit mad but aren't we all nowadays? They will see us

through. Only in the West of England. Our thanks to Robin

Markwell for bringing us that bit of light relief. Let's talk politics

again. Thangam, the polls are narrowing, aren't they? Do you think

Mr Corrigan can make it and be in ten Downing St? I don't want to call

to go, a week in four days, the to go, a week in four days, the

result of play for. What I am finding and what my colleagues are

telling me is there is a mixture of things people are concerned about,

school cuts, concerned about cuts to the police, the worried about the

National Health Service. All of those things have an answer in the

Labour manifesto and I'm guessing that is why people are warming to

us. They are warming to Mr Corbyn as well but you resigned and would not

work with them on the front bench because you thought he was

incompetent. Yes and here we are with the great manifesto which I'm

fully behind, I'm delighted about it. I did press Karen Smith your

colleague on this last week. And you look at me and say aye think Jeremy

Corbyn would make a good Prime Minister. I think a Labour Prime

Minister will be so much better than a Tory Prime Minister. You can't get

the words out. Now you, Simon, this idea of putting up Theresa May and

ignoring the conservative brand almost if you like, that seems ill

backfired. I have seen no evidence of that. She is the leader of the

Conservative Party and Prime Minister of the Conservative

government. This is one of the leaflets going through the doors.

The word conservative is down there. The word conservative is down there.

What I pointed out was when you opened it down there is Theresa May

and there were Conservatives with our logo also I think it is very

hard to suggest that people in this country would not know the Theresa

Conservative Prime Minister. Let me Conservative Prime Minister. Let me

now very serious times. We have the now very serious times. We have the

difficult job of delivering Brexit. I think the country knows that you

want a steadfast reliable tried and tested leader of the country. And

not... It is certainly not Mr Farren not... It is certainly not Mr Farren

and it is certainly not Mr Corbyn who we know cannot be trusted and

security. You cannot be trusted on defence or the economy. Do you

accept that the manifesto that Mrs Mary put out in her name, she said

it is my manifesto, it is dour, it offers nothing for you to sell on

the doorstep. Austerity cuts. I am a parent of three children and when I

talked other parents about additional money for education,

about making sure that children also about making sure that children also

have a free breakfast when they need, that is going down very well.

What we have is a sensible deliverable programme of government,

delivering on the referendum but proving that we can both Rob our

heads and patter tummies at the same time. We have a wider domestic

agenda of reform and diving... Let's bring in the Lib Dems. We need

strong people in politics but strong people who will stand up to school

cuts, stand up to the watering down cuts, stand up to the watering down

of funding for National Health Service. If we are having Brexit

then what we need is members of Parliament who will stand up to keep

the free trade we have had for the free trade we have had for

decades rather than risking us crashing out of Europe was no deal

and that is really worrying employers in the constituency in

Taunton Deane, it is worrying anybody who has a job that is only

affected by European trade and those of a kind of strong issues we need

to think about. The except Brexit is going to happen? If the majority

continues to be in favour of Brexit. We have never seen the deal that was

top of it, no one has had a chance to see it let alone vote on it. But

what importantly if we are going out of Europe then we have to protect

the best that we have with Europe. You keep seeing F, you have not

accepted it. You have not accepted the will of the people? We believe

that when the deal comes back a first referendum on the deal with

the option to remain should be there. Let's bring in any from Ukip.

Brexit will happen, so it is job done, you can stand down can't you?

Mrs May is a remainder, the Chancellor is a remainder, most of

our front bench is a remainder, the chap who wrote the manifesto, now it

is not done. I actually agree with Gideon, you need strong members of

Parliament up there because I don't believe we are going to get the

Brexit the people thought it would get. We have seen back sliding

already, the European Court of Human Rights will remain in force until

2022. I'm sorry was I talking when you're interrupting? There was only

knew what they were voting for, the knew what they were voting for, the

wound. There was one question. You want to be in the European Union,

yes or no? So when you see you now that people wanted to leave then you

don't know. You will see David Cameron and George Osborne crystal

clear seniors wanting to leave the single market, or neutered. I wanted

about Pope -- public spending. Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party

offer for extra bank holidays, what police, feature is in and the rest

of it. We are confident that the of it. We are confident that the

sums add up and the country we afford it? I have been through the

costing stop -- costings document prepared by the Labour Party and

we'll how much it'll cost to have the extra police officers and where

we will get money from. The costings document is a good document, EIF S

have made a few criticisms that we are well of Abbey well I just four,

but what they also did they said the Conservative manifesto was barely

costed at all and that is the real question here. We don't go as far as

the public spending, and as the Institute for Fiscal Studies have

said they do not believe the sums add up for Labour conservatives. Our

only change in income taxes 1p on the rate of income tax for the

health service which people understand, they can see that ring

fenced money going to the health service. We must have manifesto that

Does your manifesto add up? Of Does your manifesto add up? Of

course it does. What EIF S has said is that if you look at the Labour

Party manifesto, and what we're trying to do now was encourage

business to grow and encourage people to pay and invest. If you are

to deliver policies were real mass lies Asian was not costed,... We are

just taking franchises back. You would have the highest tax burden

for 70 years. The Ukip manifesto is 90% the same in 2015, although have

changed. They want politicians with foresight hindsight?

We've spoken to all the main parties on Sunday Politics over

But there are independent and minor party candidates standing in just

Martin Jones has been to meet some of them.

A warning - his report does contain a man in a pink leotard.

Vote for the monster raving loony party. Driving the message home,

comedy candidate making a serious point. Disabled firefighter George

standing for the monster raving loony party. And raising money for

behind him it is all coming from his behind him it is all coming from his

own pocket. Will cost me eight or ?900 but do you spend it in ?100 on

a weeks holiday something? I don't know. I'm having three weeks fun. It

Nonvoters vote for the monster Nonvoters vote for the monster

raving with a party. Your vote counts. With no team to help

canvassing is a slow and lonely job. In Bristol and other one-man

campaign but with naked ambition. campaign but with naked ambition.

Former adult film producer John Langley protesting after being

barred from a women's hustings. It is quite fun to be an independent

candidate, I am now dressed like this. The only thing I am short of

its high heels but I did not want to make myself look stupid. It is tough

being an independent when you're not being invited to speak at some of

the hustings. After all there is no such thing as bad publicity. It is

also vital for independents to explain the ideas. Especially

radical ones. And he ever heard of a research-based economy? He money

free party believes in a research-based economy, world

without money or work. But it is a real job getting the message across.

You at the man who is claiming that you're going to get rid of all money

and have an offer everyone. You're telling me... In a monopoly -based

system you cannot allow what he wants to get through. Even if you

don't believe in money you still need ?500 for the deposit. I

borrowed that from my parents, that money there. I haven't got spare

cash lying about for such a investment as that so I said to him

if I can borrowed of you I will pay it back in instalments and I want

deposit. So you got some free money? deposit. So you got some free money?

It is debt -based. While independents may face an uphill

struggle, no one can see all struggle, no one can see all

candidates are the same. Makes you proud to be British.

My thanks to my guests Simon Hoare, Thangam Debbonaire, Gideon Amos

re-elected. Is the only choice for strong and stable leadership.

Now, after the Manchester attack, will the final week of election

campaigning different in tone from what came before? My panel are here.

Tim Marshall, it will be very front of Centre for the next few days. Is

that a good thing for the election if it is going to be framed to who

do you feel more safe with? It is inevitable but I think it will only

be part of the election. As I said before the opt out, for many voters

this is also about economics, unemployment. It is not all about

Brexit, nor is it only about security. What it will do, I hope,

is get the tone of the debate right. Although I have already seen the

tone being lowered. I wasn't impressed with Mr Corbyn's speech

last week blaming it on a foreign policy, which is a wafer thin

analysis of what is going on. Inappropriate timing too soon? No, I

think the argument is utter nonsense. I don't want to attack

just one side. The Conservative party, I've forgotten which minister

has already said that we would be safer under a Tory Prime Minister,

it has got nothing to do with Labour or Tory government, the next Islamic

attack. It is to do with jihadist ideology, not party policies. You

raise an important issue about tone. It also points to a broader

argument, one we were having earlier, has politics been two

courses with this issue of extremism? Has the conversation

about it tiptoed around some of the sensitive issues? And by the media.

You highlight the problem of this being part of the election campaign

by saying, has politics been too cautious? Who do you mean by

politics? And in an election campaign there is a duty to be a

divide, and adamant about values, policies etc. Security is an issue

that transcends those political divides. So I think it is deeply

unhealthy. It is nobody's fault a tragedy occurred. But if you ask me

does it help or enhance an election debate? Emphatically not. A tragic

event brings politics, as you call it, together. Security is an issue

that is complex and doesn't divide neatly. Elections are political

battles, by definition. So I think the coming together of this, a

tragedy occurred anyway, but it is an unfortunate context. Do you agree

or do you think this is a time to talk about these issues? Is it a

time to review the level of argument? This is a political

debate. I personally think the politicians should have been out and

about on Wednesday. There is no wrong time to get it right. We

mustn't let the terrorists affect our way of life. But they have when

we disrupt the election campaign. It may be party political. But for a

lot of voters, including me, I want to hear from party leaders. What do

you plan to do about this? Right now, I've not heard anything that

suggests any of these parties have got to grips with the real problem,

which is that we are not actually tackling the problem in our midst.

Douglas Murray touched on it earlier. We have not even come to

grips with the scale of the problem. Does Labour have a grip -- Power

Point in terms of terrorist legislation? It is complicated. And

not all of it has worked or is used enough by government? It is another

example where this doesn't work in an election debate because David

Davis has opposed a lot of this terrorism legislation. He is now

heading Brexit. There is a civil liberties argument which I

personally have doubts about. Again, it brings people together from the

major parties. And Corbyn didn't actually say it was the cause of

terrorism, British foreign policy, but it helped to facilitate

terrorism, which is a different argument. Again, that would be

supported by some Tories as well. That is why it is difficult in an

election campaign for this issue to dominate. The front page of the

Sunday Times talks about a campaign relaunch, which may not, grow as a

great surprise following the social care fiasco. Do we know what that

will entail? It sounds like Boris Johnson will play a role. The whole

point is it was all about Theresa May and it turns out that is not

quite good enough. The more we have seen of Theresa May, the less

impressive she has looked. Certainly the Andrew Neil interview just

repeating the same thing again and again. Voters don't like that. They

like people who are honest and actually engage with them. When we

see beat interviews in the next few days, I think it will be interesting

to see if she changes tack and tries to engage with what people are

asking. If it is back to leadership and Brexit, and the economy, will

that be more comfortable ground? I think so. I understand framing it in

terms of Brexit. But she has got to broaden it out. I think that is why

she is broadening it out. I don't think the tragic events will

absolutely dominate. That would be a small victory for terrorism. This is

a country of 65 million people with an awful lot of issues. We have 65

million votes, well, 65 million people with opinions in two weeks.

It is quite a long campaign. There is still time to go. What do you

think Labour will be focusing on from now on? I would imagine they

will look very closely at where they are well ahead in the opinion polls

and focus on that relentlessly. Public services, NHS etc. And try to

get it off as soon as possible from security and fees is used which, on

one level at least, appear to be a gift to the Conservatives. I assume

that is what they are going to do. But this is a very unpredictable

campaign where nothing has gone according to plan. Let's look ahead.

On Wednesday evening we have got an election debate. It is in Cambridge.

Leaders of some of the parties. Amber Rudd will be representing the

Conservatives. We don't know yet who will represent Labour. Today we have

had Amber Road and Diane Abbott against each other on Andrew Marr.

Let's have a look. I think there is something to be said for a Home

Secretary who has actually worked in the Home Office. I work in the home

office for nearly three years as a graduate trainee. This government

has always felt that urgency. That is why we have been putting in

additional money. It is significant that the commission for extremism in

the manifesto was put in before Manchester. We need to do more. You

voted against prescribing those groups. Because there were groups on

that list I deemed to be dissidents rather than terrorist organisations.

We are making good progress with the companies who put in place

encryption. We will continue to build on that. It was 34 years ago.

I had a rather splendid Afro at the time. I don't have the same

hairstyle. And I don't have the same views. It is 34 years on. The

hairstyle has gone. Some of the views have gone. So you no longer,

you regret what you said about the IRA? The hairstyle has gone, the

views have gone. I would say to Diane Abbott that I have changed my

hairstyle are few times in 34 years but I have not changed my view of

how we keep the British public safe. Let's get away from hairstyle sides

talk about the prospect of the two of them taking part in the election

debate. Would you like to see that? On one level I would like to see it

and another the level I would like to see an intelligent debate. I'm

glad I never had an Afro or supported the IRA. Whenever Diane

Abbott steps out in a TV studio or a radio studio, Labour haemorrhage

votes. She cannot say things like my regret supporting this or that

legislation. She is an absolute disaster. If Labour put her up, they

are beyond mad. Who do you think Labour should put up? By the way, I

did have an Afro! I based my whole log on Kevin Keegan and it was good.

That is the wrong question. I will explain why. The Labour campaign, it

seems to me there were only five or six people put up. That is the fault

of others who refused to take part. It also shows the degree to which

the current leadership can only rely on five or six people. I would

imagine we are talking about a pool of five or six people. As for my

judgment as to who the best public performer is in that pool, it would

be by some margin John McDonnell, who is a very good interviewee and

performer. I think he is a very good performer. It would come back to the

economy at some point, presumably. But then it comes back to the IRA. I

don't think the debate will be very illuminating. I think if Amber Rudd

is there, Diane Abbott should be there. I think the leaders should be

debating. Some people say it is froth. I think the leader -- the

electorate gets a sense of the leaders. On haircuts, I would like

to thank both of them are talking about the haircuts. I am looking

forward to tomorrow's papers and the theme that will run through the

week. Let's not finish on the hair. Thank you very much for being our

guests. That is it for today. Thank the panel for Jonny May. Andrew Neil

will be back next weekend. And I will be back on BBC Two on Tuesday.

That is at midday with more daily politics. In the meantime, have a

very lovely bank holiday. From all of us here, bye-bye.

As voters prepare to go to the polls to choose who represents them

the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon joins me for the Andrew Neil Interviews.

One minute to get the food on the plate.

..team them up with a Michelin starred chef,

putting their reputation on the line.

..which team will have the recipe for success?

One minute to get the food on the plate.